Aws-sdk-js: MessageStructure: 'json' is buggy?

[aichholzer]

I am trying to send a JSON message to an iOS client. When I send the message as plain text it work just fine. However, setting the "MessageStructure: 'json'" and then the "Message" as a JSON object, as detailed in the AWS document I get a funny error: "InvalidParameterType: Expected params.Message to be a string"

If you want to send different messages for each transport protocol, set the value of the MessageStructure parameter to json and use a JSON object for the Message parameter. See the Examples section for the format of the JSON object. (From: http://docs.aws.amazon.com/AWSJavaScriptSDK/latest/frames.html)

I am sending:

params = {
  MessageStructure: 'json',
  Message: { 
      default: 'A notification from us!',
      APNS_SANDBOX: {aps:{alert:"Hello and have a good day."}}
   },
   TargetArn: '...'
};

(I have also tried sending the APNS_SANDBOX as an escaped string, same issue...)
To me this seems like a major bug.

Any ideas?

[lsegal]

The Message value has to be encoded as a string, so you can try calling JSON.stringify({ ... }) on your JSON structure and pass it through as a JSON encoded string. This documentation seems misleading to me-- there seems to be room for improvement here.

[aichholzer]

Man, I was going crazy on this issue and I swear I tried the JSON.stringify() before and it still was not working. I just did a complete new start, re-wrote the whole thing and tried the stringify method again. Magically; it works now.

Some times a simple, plain and different point of view (or explanation) makes a complete difference sense.

Thank you. Next time I am around your city you have a free burger + beer (same applies if you are around my city)
:)

[aichholzer]

And yes, I agree; the AWS documentation has room for a lot of improvement. A JSON encoded string is not a JSON object, not to me, at least.

[aichholzer]

Another question; what about this:

'InvalidParameter: Invalid parameter: JSON must contain an entry for \'default\' or \'APNS_SANDBOX\'

I was sending:

params = {
  MessageStructure: 'json',
  Message: {
      APNS_SANDBOX: {aps:{alert:"Hello and have a good day."}}
   },
   TargetArn: '...'
};

The error says "or" so in my opinion the "APNS_SANDBOX" should do the trick, no?

[lsegal]

That's a good question (and point). This came up in the Ruby SDK a while back (https://github.com/aws/aws-sdk-ruby/issues/336) and it looks like the right way was to use both parameters there. I would suggest opening a thread in the SNS forums to see if they have any insight on what is going on with that validation error message. Perhaps they can make it more clear.

[aichholzer]

Thank you, will do.
Have a good one.

[aichholzer]

And found another issue which might be related to this module:

params = {
  MessageStructure: 'json',
  Message: {
      default: "I am default":
      APNS_SANDBOX: {aps:{alert:"Hello and have a good day."}}
   },
   TargetArn: '...'
};

And guess what I receive on my iOS device? - Yes, the "default". It seems to be overriding the whole object's other properties. If, of course, I try to put the payload into the "default" it also complains.

Any ideas?
Using Amazon is really starting to get frustrating.

[ploddi]

I have same issue when using AWS SNS CLI.

[lsegal]

@gloopeezza if this same behavior occurs in the CLI I would definitely recommend opening a thread on the SNS forums as this would likely be a service issue, and not specific to the JS SDK.

[aichholzer]

Found the issue about the "default" overriding the APNS property's value; the "Massage" itself must be encoded as a valid string, say JSON.stringify() for example. The trick is applying the same to the "APNS_SANDBOX". For example:

params = {
  MessageStructure: 'json',
  Message: JSON.stringify({
      default: "I am default":
      APNS_SANDBOX: JSON.stringify({aps:{alert:"Hello and have a good day."}})
   }),
   TargetArn: '...'
};

The above will make AWS SNS "ignore" the default and actually deliver what is expected.
I wish I had access to the SNS documentation, I would make quite some changes.

Anyway, hope this helps somebody.

[aichholzer]

@lsegal Indeed a SNS issue and not JS SDK related. Sadly no one from the SNS team seems to read the forums as issues mentioned ages ago still persist, but that is a whole new story, I guess.

Thank you.

[lsegal]

@aichholzer glad you figured out the right way to call this API. I've sent a note to the SNS team so we can get more eyes on this documentation issue on the forum thread you posted. I realize misleading and/or incorrect documentation can be frustrating, but we are always trying to improve our docs, so hopefully we can do a better job explaining these mobile push APIs in the near future. If you still don't get a response on the forums, ping me here and I'll be glad to do some more digging.

[ploddi]

Thanks for your investigation. CLI and Java SDK working as well.

[aichholzer]

@gloopeezza most welcome, I know how frustrating it can be.

[pixelogik]

@aichholzer Thanks, you saved our asses. SNS documentation is really lacking very important pieces of information.

[aichholzer]

@pixelogik glad it was of any help.

[ei02028]

Guys,

I'm trying my luck in this forum. I'm having an issue with Amazon SNS when I try to send a push notification to several devices at the same time.

I've explained my issue here: https://forums.aws.amazon.com/thread.jspa?threadID=171981

Any help?

[typemismatch]

@aichholzer wow, thanks! - the double stringify is what made it work, it's stupid but it's perfect, thanks!

[aichholzer]

@typemismatch anytime!

[robolivable]

This issue is still just as relevant as it was when it was posted. @lsegal There's still nothing in the documentation about JSON encoded strings. Your comment really helped me out.

[aichholzer]

Yes, I am not sure where the AWS team's priorities are.

[contractorwolf]

yes this is definitely weird behavior, it doesn't make sense to set it to "json" if you are then forced to pass a string.

[igor-yamshchykov]

Thanks a lot man! Wasted around two hours with that !

[DavidSunny]

@aichholzer Thank you!

[gsarfati]

@aichholzer Thank you!

[aichholzer]

:+1:

[ir-fuel]

Same issue here. Serious issues with the documentation and would never have figured this json -> string stuff out myself.
Thanks, and please, someone fix those docs :/

[jnimis]

Thanks you so much for this answer!

[mdw19873]

@aichholzer You're still saving people hours and hours of headaches! Thanks!

[surf2day]

Thanks for the answer, never would have solved it without it! Cheers.

[USSliberty]

That's incredible that still in 2017 we have to dig in such old issues. Why not mention this example on the docs?

Anyway thank you @aichholzer 👍

[malithjkmt]

For GCM the structure is like below, which is taken from this gist

    let payload = {
            GCM: {
                data: {
                    message:'Hello world'
                }
            }
    };
    // first have to stringify the inner GCM object...
    payload.GCM = JSON.stringify(payload.GCM);

    // then have to stringify the entire message payload
    payload = JSON.stringify(payload);

    var params = {
        MessageStructure: 'json',
        Message: payload,
        Subject: 'TEST SUBJECT',
        TargetArn: 'TargetArn'
    };

[builtbyproxy]

My GCM implementation is:

    const params = {
        Message: JSON.stringify({
            default: "This is the message for you...",
            GCM: JSON.stringify({ 
                data: {
                    message: "Hello World",
                }
            })
        }),
        MessageStructure: "json",
        TargetArn: 'arn:aws:...', // This is the endpointARN
    };

    const sns = new AWS.SNS();
    sns.publish(params as any, function(err, data) {
        if(err) {
            console.log('error occured: ', err, err.stack); 
        } else {
            console.log('Success: ', data);
        }
    });

[lock[bot]]

This thread has been automatically locked since there has not been any recent activity after it was closed. Please open a new issue for related bugs and link to relevant comments in this thread.